Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: gzd Date: Apr 15, 2010 4:55am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: The Undertaker and His Pals

Just because it wasn't registered doesn't mean it's PD:

According to http://chart.copyrightdata.com/index.php
1964 to 1977
Registration after the year containing the 28th anniversary of publication is valid. Under rules passed by Congress June 26, 1992, renewal registration is not required for a post-1963 work to receive copyright protection beyond 28 years. The Copyright Office will accept an initial registration during the renewal period. In the past, registration made after the first term was invalid because the work had by then irretrievably fallen into the public domain.

Registration is only necessary to file a lawsuit for copyright infringement (http://www.publaw.com/advantage.html). Registration for this film can still be done at any time before 2061.
The film is copyrighted, provided it has a valid notice.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: HektorT Date: Apr 16, 2010 2:02am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: The Undertaker and His Pals

Hi,

Registration only became optional after 1989. After 1989 you get copyright, but registration is necessary to file a lawsuit. Pre-1989 without registration you get nothing. The text you quote refers to copyright renewals (after the initial 28 year term)

From the same website, on this page:
http://chart.copyrightdata.com/ch04.html

>>Prior to 1978, accurate registration was required to secure a copyright after publication. Furthermore, filing had to be prompt.<<

In the case of films published between 1964-1978, if the film has a notice but was never registered, it is PD. If that was not the case, as someone here is suggesting, there would have been little need for GATT copyright restoration as most of those films contain a notice.

Note: For GATT films that were never registered during this period, but contained a notice when they were published, in many cases they got their rights back.


This post was modified by HektorT on 2010-04-16 09:02:13

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: PeteGCDB Date: Apr 15, 2010 10:13am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: The Undertaker and His Pals

It does have a copyright on it at the end for 1966. So I guess I wont be adding it unless theres some gap in the registration clause. Let me know.

This post was modified by PeteGCDB on 2010-04-15 17:13:55